Re: [eman] Read-Only or Read-Write EMAN MIBs

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Wed, 12 February 2014 15:01 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 075DD1A0310 for <eman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:01:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.448
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.448 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GbjPWMkbogBZ for <eman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:01:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3AC1A01DA for <eman@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:01:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.122] (static-72-71-250-38.cncdnh.fast04.myfairpoint.net [72.71.250.38]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FFD26EBF5F; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:01:00 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_ACEE417D-B89D-4C66-A662-3C3DB6C4D946"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140212145008.GA81278@elstar.local>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 10:00:59 -0500
Message-Id: <F537710E-CFD0-44B6-8CE7-2453A2C164F5@lucidvision.com>
References: <88A474D1-677D-4BA0-8399-0429A095AE45@lucidvision.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA2E403CD4@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com> <20140212145008.GA81278@elstar.local>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Cc: eman mailing list <eman@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [eman] Read-Only or Read-Write EMAN MIBs
X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group <eman.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eman>, <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/eman/>
List-Post: <mailto:eman@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman>, <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 15:01:03 -0000

On Feb 12, 2014:9:50 AM, at 9:50 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:53:24PM +0000, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
>> draft-ietf-eman-energy-monitoring-mib-08 has two writable objects. I do not understand well enough eoPowerStateEnterReason, in general I am no fan of objects that pass information by writable strings, so I do not have a clear opinion if it makes sense to make this object read-only or take it out. The second object eoPowerEnableStatusNotification is a switch that activates and de-activates notifications. Such MIB objects are not really configuration objects for the protocol or device, they rather configure the mode of work of the agents. I believe they can be left writable. 
> 
> Since the persistency of eoPowerEnableStatusNotification is not spelled
> out, it remains unclear whether this object is configuration or not.

	(Without my chair hat on)

	Differentiating between persistent configuration or non-persistent is not going to matter if SNMP writes are operationally disabled, are they?

	--Tom


> 
> /js
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
> Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>